Daugherty v. State

Missouri Court of Appeals

Daugherty v. State

570 S.W.3d 680

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 2, 2019·No. No. ED 106714·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Dack Daugherty appeals the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief based on a single allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel. We find no clear error because Daugherty failed to plead facts not refuted by the record warranting relief. Thus, no evidentiary hearing was required.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

Dack Daugherty appeals the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief based on a single allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel. We find no clear error because Daugherty failed to plead facts not refuted by the record warranting relief. Thus, no evidentiary hearing was required.

An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Daugherty v. State, 570 S.W.3d 680 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

570 S.W.3d 680 (Daugherty v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.